Proxiblog and Jack’s Counterfeit Corner

Posted on by

By Jack D. Young

Today’s feature subject- the Trifecta all over again; counterfeit 1882-CC Morgan $, counterfeit PCGS slab, and counterfeit PCGS CN “authentication” website.

This article documents what is happening to our hobby. It is important for every collector to know what is happening on eBay and other venues with counterfeit coins, slabs and websites.

I wrote an article on a similar issue at the beginning of the year; the subject was important enough to cross several forums including Coin Week, Coin World and Proxiblog : Trifecta, CN Counterfeit Coin, Slab and Website | Proxiblog Coin News and Views .

We also discussed it on the weekly “Live Coin Q&A” podcast on Thursday June 18. ❓What the Heck are EBay Sellers Doing Now? + New Discovery!

So, let’s start with the current one. I notified PCGS about this 1882-CC Morgan. As I have noted previously I use eBay for new material to write counterfeit articles on, and eBay apparently remembers me and my dumpster dive searches! The following is one page of a series of “inspiring” Bay offerings that came up the other day:

So the 1882-CC looked different and I thought worth taking a deeper dive on (notice the similar looking 1880-CC to the right as well). The original listing:

I have seen many odd listings on the Bay, but this one is notable. Starting with not-PCGS label the nomenclature seems bizarre; I have never seen a genuine one with the word “America” on it, making me think of others with “Morgan” on the label! And I had no clue what the “LM” and “Y” designations stands for; turns out they are attributions for Chinese coins!

The barcode doesn’t scan, the cert number doesn’t exist in the true PCGS database, and the gold shield looks like a child’s coloring book effort.

The seller shows front and back images and then a raw one on a scale while stating “With NFC C” for whatever that is supposed to mean.

And an old friend, “slash” the eagle! And where do you suppose the scale came from?

So bad cert #:

So, what about the reverse QR code? With that many “cn’s” in the address where do you suppose it will lead?

So a note for reference- the site we exposed at the beginning of the year was entirely different and was taken down quickly after notifying my contacts at PCGS and reporting on Proxiblog:

And the new site and images:

And like the previous site there is a “TrueView” type image to aid with authentication…

A little pricy to me at the time as I had 2 others going through the eBay refund/ return process then. Interestingly, both of them were reported through the Bay AI reporting process and came back AOK, but when I posted each on my Face Book sites and stated I bought one, they suddenly were removed along with the sellers…

So I reported this one and the bogus site to my contacts at PCGS and then posted on my personal FB page:

And poof, both the seller and listing were removed from the Bay…

From my post one can see there are Chinese coins included, as I went through the effort to find other ‘coins” on the site. Many CC Morgans and even more CN coins including this example:

Notice the cert #, 66259150 and the subject example, 66259979- each cert # in-between these shows another counterfeit. It goes on and on…

And an image of the ones I screen printed:

Saved images from the bad website

A true nightmare IMHO.

And the story continues, as after the subject listing and seller “disappeared”, more showed up to the party.

2 new sellers with the same appearing stuff, they now state “with grading box”.

I looked at the 1880-CC, and it matched the website examples but decided to purchase the 1882-CC.

And what about seller feedback? WOW, I didn’t know there was even such a thing as counterfeit perfume😎!

Yep, I took the chance of submitting feedback before receiving the item, so we will see how that worked for me.

And I did also report the 1880-CC, but both of these and the website are still up.

And eBay’s responses to both reports:

eBay’s report response states made by a “customer service agent” in both cases!

And the 1882-CC seller’s response to my feedback? Well, like another seller he cancelled my order stating I requested the cancellation.

And he added to the negative feedback chain and asked I contact them “directly to discuss”:

And an interesting anecdote, Paula Bluhm found a Chinese coin with the variety nomenclature used on this “Morgan” counterfeit! (Maybe a viewer can help with the Y and LM designations.)

I actually tried to purchase another one from the same seller, but he cancelled it after I paid for it; I was refunded by eBay.

And a 6-18 update- more sellers of these counterfeits hit the Bay, and they must have read my negative feedback and now obstruct the reverse QR code!

I purchased an 1880-CC, so we will see what I receive.

If you like posts like this, you can read more articles on counterfeit coins by Jack D. Young, Jack Riley and Michael Bugeja at this URL. Also, please subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.

Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups and across social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.

You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.

The Sole “P” Mintmark on Lincoln Cents

Posted on by

The 2017 Lincoln cent carried the “P” mint mark to celebrate the U.S. Mint’s 225th anniversary. The Mint released the coins into circulation in January 2017 without any announcement, gaining publicity as collectors began noticing the change.

While unique, these cents are common. More than 4 billion of them were struck. Examples grading MS67+ retail for $80 but typically sell for about $30 in PCGS slabs. At MS68, graded by top companies, the price skyrockets to $500; but these are ultra rarities in such a high grade. Nevertheless, it is still fun to find the 2017-P cent in pocket change.

The “P” mint mark has never been used on a cent before or after 2017.

Hobbyists know that the Philadelphia Mint used no mintmark on coins because initially there were no branch mints. However, when other mints opened in Denver and San Francisco, for instance, they started using the “D” and “S” mintmarks on coins.

Beware of scammers claiming some 2017 cents are missing the “P” mintmark. That can only happen on grease strikes. Why? Because the “P” mintmark was etched on the master die for 2017 cents. You have to know how coins are made to realize why there is no missing “P” errors on 2017 cents.

In 2018, the Philadelphia Mint returned to the convention of no mintmark.

Other denominations have used the P mintmark. The nickel used the mintmark from 1942 to 1945 on 35% Silver “War Nickels” and then was removed. The “P” returned to nickels in 1980. Also in that year, dimes, quarters, half dollars started using the P mintmark. In 1979 the P mintmark appeared on the Susan B. Anthony dollar and henceforth was used on all Philly dollar coins, including the Sacagawea, Presidential, and American Innovation dollars.

Social media has hyped “missing mintmarks” as ultra rarities. Here’s a chart of them with odds of finding any.

If you would like to know more about these missing mintmarks, click here.

If you like posts like this, please subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.

Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentaries, click here.

You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.

Protecting the good name of PCGS from eBay Counterfeits

Posted on by

Everyone knows that Chinese counterfeits have flooded the coin market with some production estimates exporting between 100,000 to 500,000 counterfeit coins per month. The majority of these are offered as raw coins on eBay, Etsy and Temu, among others. But now a new threat has emerged: sellers offering counterfeits in fake PCGS holders with phony “Not PCGS” certification sites.

This is a much-overlooked consequence because it attacks the fundamental priority of top holdering companies: authentication.

These fakes pop up when you try to access PCGS. To show how frequent, I now will access the site and report the results in 10 minutes of searching.

These are from different sellers. I could have published a dozen or more.

When viewing counterfeit “Not PCGS” coins on eBay, you’ll see that sellers have few sales. Never bid or buy from such sellers. Nevertheless, that is not the lesson here. It is the erosion of the reputation of the top holdering companies in the hobby.

While we cannot do anything about Chinese fakes, we can ask eBay to listen more closely to our messages and reports about counterfeits and perhaps fix their algorithm and provide more education for their customer service employees.

To be fair, eBay has honored many of our complaints about counterfeit coins. It has forced sellers to reimburse buyers of counterfeit coins. We know that.

But the issue now is the proliferation of counterfeits in fake PCGS holders. An algorithm or customer service employee may see that famous logo and–ironically!–believe the listing is authentic because … wait for it … it trusts PCGS’s reputation.

That is why counterfeiters are using fake PCGS holders, playing off of PCGS’s good name. They also play off the good name of top auction houses like GreatCollections with fake stickers.

Every hobbyist needs to know counterfeit detection. Click here for that. Here is a visual primer on how you, too, can identify counterfeit coins in fake PCGS holders:

You can also visit the Ant-Counterfeiting Educational Foundation for comprehensive information about all manner of fake coins.

Our concern here focuses on the hobby and the ramifications of using fake PCGS holders to fool hobbyists into thinking they have a genuine coin.

While many hobbyists have complained about counterfeits, the conventional wisdom is disappointing: nothing can be done because the Chinese government allows this as part of its economy.

That thinking results in defeatism. If nothing can be done, then the hobby is at risk. But that risk is becoming greater each day. If eBay in particular does little when informed about counterfeits, because (a) its algorithm cannot detect a fake based on die markers and (b) its customer service may not be schooled enough to know those markers, seeing only a slabbed PCGS coin; then (c) the corporate reputation of PCGS is at issue.

This is an article about that premise. eBay can argue that it has invested $X amount of dollars in counterfeit detection and even has customer service employees check listings when multiple complaints have been lodged; but if both are proving at many occasions ineffective, that is not a strong defense when it comes to PCGS. It only means that eBay’s methods need enhancement.

These are matters beyond the scope of this article.

Stephanie Sabin, president of PCGS, is aware of the ongoing issue.

She provided Proxiblog with this statement:

“Since founding PCGS in 1986, our mission has been to protect collectors through leading authentication, grading, and the most secure holders in the industry. However, a powerful brand inevitably attracts counterfeiters, and we treat combating these fraudulent holders as an aggressive, ongoing priority. True security requires staying multiple steps ahead, which is why we continually invest in advanced overt and covert security features across all our product lines. We applaud the dedicated individuals and organizations within our community who work tirelessly to educate collectors on the dangers of counterfeit holders; their vigilance to eliminate altered and fraudulent collectibles is essential to protecting consumers and preserving the integrity of the numismatic marketplace. By combining their grassroots educational initiatives with our ongoing technical innovations and strengthened marketplace partnerships, we will continue to build a safer, more secure hobby for all.”

In recent years, Chinese counterfeiters have upped the ante, targeting PCGS, often cited as the most reliable and top holdering company. Not only are the coins fake; the holders are too. And the certs open to a fake PCGS authentication site.

Proxiblog’s Jack Young, Jack Riley and Michael Bugeja have been monitoring the proliferation of “Not PCGS” counterfeit coins.

In January, Jack Young wrote, “As if the Chinese counterfeit coins in fake PCGS slabs isn’t bad enough, now there appears to be a fake Chinese PCGS website to verify them.”

Young identified this counterfeit:

Of course he checked the cert and found no similar or other coin. His next step was to try to read the reverse label QR code. He got this:

A fake coin. A fake holder. A fake site. (If you are interested in the complete article about this fake coin and site, click here.) Jack Young has found that this trifecta is happening again.

He has found two more sellers that offer fake coins in fake PCGS holders with certs going to a fake PCGS site.

Jack Young says “Michael and I have been discussing what I have termed the ‘proliferation’ of counterfeit coins using stolen PCGS Intellectual Property, fake ‘PCGS’ holders on eBay. I see all of the listings ‘allowed’ there as a huge failing of eBay. And their AI reporting process is also an apparent failure to many collectors and hobbyists as well.

“So, going forward I use eBay for new material to write counterfeit articles on, and today’s usual browse of ‘US Coins’ on the Bay resulted in 44 counterfeit coins in fake PCGS slabs listed on just the 1st page. I screen-printed a number but quite frankly got tired of the effort after documenting these below.”

Snippet of the 44 listings available on 1-page of eBay US Coin listings 6-11-26

The frustration with eBay stems from counterfeit experts using the eBay reporting system only to be told that the fraudulent listing is fine and nothing will be done. Example:

But it gets worse. Jack Young has been warned about reporting counterfeit coins on eBay, further damaging its supposed defense that it vets all reports of fake offerings on the platform. Example:

Because of the proliferation of “Not PCGS” counterfeits, Jack Young and Proxiblog have received or seen requests on Facebook coin groups to check if an actual authentic PCGS coin is, well, authentic!

In sum, scam sellers acting in effect as agents of Chinese counterfeiters are eroding the very heart of what top holdering companies do: authenticate.

The question now, of course, is what can be done collectively.

Jack Young and I have contacts at PCGS, which has encouraged us to report fake offerings and to do one more thing: inform the company if eBay refuses to take action. But that will hardly fix the problem. The issue at hand is what can be done when popular platforms like eBay get it wrong at the expense of its bidders and holdering companies.

That will have to be decided by others.

Proxiblog can help by continuing to grow our subscriber base and influence on Facebook. Jack Young and Jack Riley also have large spheres of influence. But we need the American Numismatic Association, the U.S. Mint and the National Coin and Bullion Association to understand this new threat of corporate reputation and to break the defeatism that nothing can be done.

Let’s review legalities:

Counterfeiting or knowingly passing fake coins is a federal crime punishable by up to 15 years in prison and severe fines. The U.S. Secret Service investigates all suspected counterfeit coins.

The creation, sale and distribution (pertinent here) of fake coins can be prosecuted under United States Codes:

  • Manufacturing and Forging (18 U.S. Code § 485): Falsely making, forging, or counterfeiting any coin (valued higher than 5 cents) or any gold or silver bar is punishable by up to 15 years in prison and substantial fines.
  • Passing or Possessing (18 U.S. Code § 485): Passing, selling or bringing counterfeit coins into the United States with the intent to defraud carries a penalty of up to 5 years in prison.

There is also the Hobby Protection Act, which states, it is illegal to buy, sell or possess counterfeit coins. Moreover, all replica, copy or imitation numismatic items must be plainly and permanently marked with the word “COPY”.

If you have been bought a counterfeit coin, you should turn it over to your area United States Secret Service Field Office.

Jack Young, Michael Bugeja and Proxiblog subscribers have encountered sellers who bought a counterfeit coin, are reselling it as genuine and refuse to take it down.

We present one example here, but we encounter this regularly.

Here are exchanges by Bugeja and subscriber Tim Scott, trying fruitlessly with eBay to take down this obvious fake. Our complaints were ignored by eBay.

Despite our concerns, shared across Facebook coin groups, the fake coin in a fake PCGS holder sold for $607.33. You can see it had 24 bids.

We thank Stephanie Sabin and PCGS for helping us safeguard their reputation and our hobby.

If you like posts like this, please go to our counterfeit archive with reports from Jack Riley, Jack D. Young, John Lorenzo and Michael Bugeja. Also, please subscribe so you be informed whenever there is a new article or column.

Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.

You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.

1988/88-D Cents: Flared “FG” Variety

Posted on by

The “Flared FG” is a transitional variety found on some 1988 and 1988-D Lincoln cents. It occurred when U.S. Mint employees mistakenly used a redesigned die for 1989 cents.

The initials, “FG,” to the right of the Lincoln Memorial building, refer to designer Frank Gasparro.

This variety requires magnification to identify.

As you can see in this expanded photo above, the “flared” initial is the “G.” It has a noticeable serif. The regular lacks that. Now notice the thickness, or higher relief, of the flared “FG.” The revision was meant to make the initials clearer and distinct.

That’s how you tell.

Again, though, because the variety requires close inspection, have handy a regular 1988/88-D cent so you can compare.

These are easy to find because of the huge mintage: 6,092,810,000 for 1988; 5,253,740,443, 1988-D.

Then compare initials, as below.

The variety designation is FS-901 “Reverse of 1989.” Worn examples sell for a few dollars to $25; mint state, about $150. Several at MS68 have sold for hundreds of dollars.

If you intend to purchase or bid on an example from eBay or Facebook, make sure that the photos are clear enough and magnified so that you can identify the variety. Here’s a typical photo; you can try expanding it with your own photo app. But in general, avoid these.

If you like posts like this, subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.

Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.

You can find more information about types, varieties, errors, grading, bidding and buying in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider buying or gifting the work for a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist blog. Thank you.

Counterfeit  Bicentennial Dollar

Posted on by

By Jack Riley

Key date coins are a target for counterfeiters with a large profit to be made, but what about common date coins? Well, nothing is safe!

This article doesn’t focus on a connected “family,” rather a specific coin. This Bicentennial Eisenhower Dollar was previously shared in a Facebook group and many were shocked to learn that it is in fact counterfeit!

One may notice at a glance many raised “lumps” across the obverse fields and a large tell of the distended letters primary in “One Dollar”.

This surely isn’t a “one off” piece. I haven’t found a second example of one surface since this one so additional repeating marks are inconclusive. I suspect the diagonal notch through “trust” will be seen on all examples using this obverse.

Why would China counterfeit a common dollar like this?

Many hobbyists think that a high value of a coin makes it a candidate for counterfeiters. Counterfeiters take advantage of this false sense of security. The coin here probably was part of a complete set that someone purchased, realized the deception, and used or sold.

It costs about a dime to a quarter to make these dollars. Sell one, even for a dollar, and you have a substantial profit.

If you like posts like this, please go to our counterfeit archive with reports from Jack Riley, Jack D. Young, John Lorenzo and Michael Bugeja. Also, please subscribe so you be informed whenever there is a new article or column.

Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.

You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.

1998-2000 Wide AM Markers

Posted on by

While new hobbyists typically search for the unicorns–1992/92-D Close AM cents–veteran collectors know that chances are infinitely better looking for the 1998, 1999 and 2000 Wide AM varieties.

If you are interested in the 1992/92-D Close AM cents, click here. This post is about the 1998, 1999, and 2000 Wide AM varieties, all from the Philadelphia Mint.

In 1994, the U.S. Mint developed rules for Lincoln Memorial Cents. Business strikes were supposed to use a “Close AM” reverse die. Proof coins would use the “Wide AM” reverse die.

Between 1998-200, two US Mints produced business strikes for cents, Philadelphia and Denver. At the Philly facility, coin operators mistakenly used a “Wide AM” reverse die on some of the production runs.

There are three markers to discern what you have.

Let’s dissect each of these.

Now let’s compare with the regular correct business strikes:

Values for these varieties depend on the coin’s condition and color (Brown, Red-Brown, or Red).

Here are mintage estimates and values for each year:

YEARESTIMATED VARIETY MINTAGERANGE OF VALUES
1998100,000$25 to $150, Lower Mint State
19992,000 $400 to $1,000+, Lower Mint State
2000200,000+$15 to $35, Lower Mint State

Do not purchase raw Wide AM 1998-2000 cents unless you know the markers. Almost every raw example on eBay has the wrong markers (Close AM) for the rare 1999 cent. Examples:

There are true “unicorn” coins, theorized but never found, including the 1964 Morgan Dollar and the 1965 Kennedy Half on a 1964 90% Silver Planchet. You can add the 1998-D Wide AM, 1999-D Wide AM and 2000-D Wide AM to that list.

ALL of the several 1998-D, 1999-D and 2000-D Cents on eBay listed as “Wide AM” are just regular “Close AM” cents. Example:

If you like posts like this, subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.

Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.

You can find more information about types, varieties, errors, grading, bidding and buying in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider buying or gifting the work for a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist blog. Thank you.

Filled “S” 1921-S Morgan

Posted on by

Grease or debris, coupled with die deterioration, causes a filled mintmark, evidenced on many coins, including Morgan dollars. But the “1921-S VAM 6B, Filled S” dollar is special because the mintmark has a flaw in the die as well as a gouge on the obverse.

Before we delve into this variety, we need to define some terms, beginning with VAMs, initials of numismatists Van Allen and Mallis who cataloged die varieties of U.S. Morgan and Peace silver dollars.

You can learn more about VAMs by reading this article by Jack Riley.

As noted earlier, the specific die marker for this coin is: VAM 6B.

In addition to the filled “S” mintmark, the 1921-S variety has a die gouge on the obverse, making it more valuable than a regular issue.

A die gouge can be mistaken at times for a die crack. So we have to define those, too.

Die gouges occur when a foreign object is dragged across the die face, allowing metal to fill the divot, resulting in a raised area. Sometimes the dragged object creates a line, as in the 1921-S VAM 6B dollar. It may appear like a die crack. The difference is a gouge is created by that foreign object whereas a die crack results from pressure during the striking process.

Here’s an example:

Now that we know those terms, we can discuss the die markers of the 1921-S VAM 6B.

Let’s look at the filled S mintmark first:

The filled mintmark of this Morgan variety differs from a grease strike because the “S” also exhibits a flaw in the die, distorting the S. Compare:

Now let’s look closely at the die gouge:

Not all die gouges are straight lines as here. In this case, the dragged object caused the line.

This particular variety carries a unique number in the PCGS catalogue (412698) from which these photos have been taken.

PCGS CoinFacts also lists values for this variety. Compare the prices with a regular 1921-S:

As you can see, the higher the grade on this variety, the more valuable.

While you may not be interested in this Morgan, going through the die markers here–or any VAM–will help you learn more about the minting process.

If you like posts like this, subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.

Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.

You can find more information about types, varieties, errors, grading, bidding and buying in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider buying or gifting the work for a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist blog. Thank you.

Rare 1965 Transitional Errors

Posted on by

When the US Mint makes a transition from one type of planchet to another, as we have seen with the popular 1982-D Small Date brass cent, unused planchets are sure to be stuck somewhere in the coinage bins, which is precisely what happened with 1965 dimes and quarters.

To get your hands on one or both, you need to be rich … or lucky with rolls and pocket change. Nevertheless, you’ll have better odds with these than the 1982-D Small Date transitional error, of which only two have been found.

1965 Dime on 90% Silver Planchet

1965 dimes were supposed to be copper-nickel. The price of silver was responsible for common denominations to transition to clad. A small number of silver blanks got into feeder bins. Between 20-100 of the rarity may have escaped into circulation.

Value is between $3,000 and $13,000 and higher, depending on condition and certification grade by a top-tier holdering company.

To determine if you found the rarity, look at the edge. If you see a copper stripe, you have the clad dime. If you can’t see the stripe, weigh it. A clad dime weighs 2.27 grams; the silver dime, 2.5 grams.

1965 Quarter on 90% Silver Planchet

The same thing happened with quarters as with the dime above. Some leftover 1964 silver planchets got into 1965 clad hoppers. Fewer than 20 are believed to have left the Mint.

An authentic 1965 Washington quarter accidentally struck on a 90% silver planchet is valued between $4,000 and $17,000+, depending on its condition and professional grade and certification. Again, look at the edge. If you see a copper stripe, you have the common clad quarter. If not, weigh it. A clad quarter weighs 5.67 grams whereas a silver one weighs 6.25 grams.

The 1965 Half Dollar “Unicorn”

Hobbyists searching for the “Unicorn”–a coin so rare as to be mythic–continue to look for a 1965 Half Dollar struck on a 1964 90% silver planchet. Hey, if the same thing happened with the dime and quarter, why not the JFK Half?

Good luck with that. None have been found.

If you think you found the unicorn, it should weigh 12.5 grams whereas a 40% regular strike should weigh 11.5 grams.

It goes without saying, beware of replicas and alterations and false claims on eBay and Facebook.

If you like posts like this, subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.

Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and other social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.

You can find more information about types, varieties, errors, grading, bidding and buying in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider buying or gifting the work for a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist blog. Thank you.

15 Transitional Errors. Do You Know Them?

Posted on by

One of the most accessed Proxiblog articles–thousands, each week–concerns the transitional error 1982-D Small Date bronze cent. But did you know there are 15 famous transitional errors in which the wrong planchet was used during production?

They are happened the same way: The wrong planchet got stuck in a hopper or production bin and somehow was shaken loose and struck.

Here are examples:

1943 Bronze Cents

When the Mint switched from zinc-coated steel cents in 1943, some 30 examples were minted with copper planchets. Each has specific markers, including the date.

To see all the markers for the 1943-P, 20-30 specimens; 1943-D and 1943-S, click here.

1944 Steel Cents

Just as in 1943, the wrong planchet–this time steel cents–got into the hoppers of 1944 bronze planchets. About 30 specimens are estimated to have left the mint.

To see all the markers for the 1944-P, 1943-D and 1943-S, click here.

One of the rarest, next to the 1943-D copper cent (only one example found), is the 1982-D Small Date bronze cent. Only two examples have been found.

1982-D Small Date Bronze Cent

One of the rarest ultra rarities with only two found in 2016 and 2019, the 1982-D Small Date 3.1 grams continues to be one of the most sought-after coins, primarily because social media publicized it across online venues, including YouTube and Facebook.

Again, markers are important–not only the weight. Here’s a quick illustration about Small Date and two aspects of the number “2” on the date.

To read more about these markers, click here.

1965 Silver Dimes

This rarity occurred when 1964 90% silver planchets got into 1965 copper-nickel clad dimes. At the time the Mint was producing both 1964 silver coins and 1965 clad coins, a small number of silver blanks got into feeder bins. Between 20-100 of the rarity may have escaped into circulation.

To determine if you found the rarity, look at the edge. If you see a copper stripe, you have the clad dime. If you can’t see the stripe, weigh it. A clad dime weighs 2.27 grams; the silver dime, 2.5 grams.

1965 Silver Quarter

The same thing happened with quarters as with the dime above. Some leftover 1964 silver planchets got into 1965 clad hoppers. Fewer than 20 left the Mints.

Again, look at the edge. If you see a copper stripe, you have the common clad quarter. If not, weigh it. A clad quarter weighs 5.67 grams whereas a silver one weighs 6.25 grams.

1977-D Silver Clad Quarter

This transitional error happened when a few–estimates are a dozen or so–40% silver Bicentennial planchets, again left over from previous production, got into the wrong hopper.

Again, do the edge and weight tests. If you see a copper stripe on the edge, you have clad quarter. If not, weigh it. A clad quarter weighs 5.67 grams; the transitional error, 5.75 grams.

1965 Half Dollar on Cupra Planchet

In 1965, the Mint struck both silver-clad half dollars and other denominations (like dimes or quarters above). Because both metal stocks were being processed and held simultaneously in the same facility, stray copper-nickel planchets were accidentally fed into the half dollar coining press.

Again, do the edge test on this. You should see a copper stripe. Weigh it on a digital scale. A standard 1965 40% silver-clad half dollar weighs (11.5) grams, the cupra error, significantly less, based on the strike (typically 11 grams or less).

1971-D and 1977-D 40% Silver Kennedy Half Dollars

When the half dollar went clad in 1971, leftover 40% silver planchets from 1970 were struck on this error coin. When the Mint struck 1976 40% silver halves, again a few planchets made it into the 1977 Denver facility. The clad half should show a copper stripe on the edge. If you don’t see that, weigh the coin: A common 1971 and 1977 Kennedy half dollar weighs 11.34 grams; a 40% silver 1971-D or 1977-D, 11.50 grams

Fewer than 30 of these may have made it into circulation.

1974-D and 1977-D Silver Clad Eisenhower Dollars

In 1973, the San Francisco Mint struck both copper-nickel and 40% silver-clad dollars. Some silver planchets were rejected because of poor strikes. These got into the 1974-D barrels and were mistakenly struck on 40% planchets. In 1976, the Mint produced 40% silver Bicentennial Ike dollars. Again, some of the leftovers got into the 1977-D bins.

You can do the edge and weight test on the 1974-D and 1977-D dollars. Edge should show copper stripe. If so, the weight will be 22.68 grams. If you don’t see the stripe, the weight for the transitional error will be 24.59 grams.

Fewer than 15-30 of these are believed to have made it into circulation.

If you like posts like this, subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.

Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and other social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.

You can find more information about types, varieties, errors, grading, bidding and buying in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider buying or gifting the work for a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist blog. Thank you.

Identifying 1944-P/D/S Steel Cents

Posted on by

1944 steel cents from all three US Mints are extremely rare transitional errors occurring when leftover 1943 zinc-coated steel planchets became stuck in annealing furnaces, tote bins or coining presses. Because of their rarity, however–a few dozen have been actually found and authenticated–there are thousands of counterfeits, altered dates and copies flooding online coin venues.

The most common of these ultra rarities came from the Philadelphia Mint, which was using steel planchets to produce foreign coins. Some of those planchets got into the Lincoln cent bin. Fewer than 10 1944-D steel cents have been authenticated. These steel planchets were left over when the Mint started making copper cents that year. Steel planchets were mixed in totes mistakenly and were struck as 1944-S cents.

Step-by-Step Method

  1. To test if you have one of these ultra rarities, use a magnet. If it sticks, you can continue to check if real.
  2. Weigh the coin. If it weighs more than 2.7 grams, typically 3.1 grams, you have a fake.
  3. If not, look at the second “4” in the date. If you spot anything suspicious, such as a scratch or tool mark–or weird spacing between numbers–you have an altered date.
  4. Look for plating bubbles–tiny bumps–in the fields especially. You also might find pitting in these.
  5. Check for strike. Zinc-plated counterfeits have mushy devices and dates. Authentic ones have sharper devices.
  6. A key diagnostic is the word “Liberty.” Again, if mushy, you probably have a fake. In authentic examples, the word not only is sharp but also close to the edge. Striking copper differs from striking steel. The later has more hardness, pushing the “L” close to the rim.

Comparison of “Liberty”

Examples of Fakes

Online sellers on Temu and Etsy have flooded the market with all manner of fakes and replicas.

REPLICAS

CASTING BUBBLES

ZINC PLATED

It goes without saying that you should never bid on or buy a raw 1944 P/D/S steel cent that isn’t certified by a major holding company such as PCGS, NGC, ANACS and CAC. Even then, look up the certification number and check to make sure you are looking at the same coin because China also packages fake coins in fake holders. The best way is to wait for one of these rarities featured on a major auction house such as GreatCollections, Heritage or Stacks Bowers.

f you like posts like this, please go to our counterfeit archive with reports from Jack Riley, Jack D. Young, John Lorenzo and Michael Bugeja. Also, please subscribe so you can be informed whenever there is a new article or column.

Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.

You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.